Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Switch to Forum Live View Which is riskier, abortion or childbirth?
5 years ago  ::  Apr 10, 2010 - 3:02PM #21
Damianaraven
Posts: 71

Apr 10, 2010 -- 2:04PM, newsjunkie wrote:


Yes there are PL people who do support increasing assistance to families with children, including raising taxes to help them. It would be good if those PLers would speak out in support of having society as a whole help families. That would probably make more of an impact on PLers like my facebook friend, who (based on her postings) lashes against  anyone who is not aligned with her political and religious views, than anything anybody who is PC says.




I'm not entirely sure that more welfare assistance "after the fact" will do any good. On the contrary, generous benefit programs seem to entice a certain type of women to become "professional" mothers at the expense of the system. Don't get me wrong - I'm all in favor of government programs, but I find I must insist on programs that will actually help instead of providing people with incentive to breed rampantly. For example, I think that free day care programs should be expanded exponentially while cash benefits should be minimized or even done away with. The biggest hindrance to single mothers is the need for child care. If a woman has two or more children, the cost of day care becomes more than can be offset by a working class job. It's this simple mathematical fact (rather than laziness) which causes many women to decide that getting a job isn't worth it. Another fact (this one of a socio-economic nature) is that people who work and pay taxes are a BENEFIT to society, so every effort should be made to get these women WORKING in such a way that they and their children can live decently on the wages they earn.


A better way of using government money to eliminate the need for abortion is EDUCATION. What passes for sex ed in our public schools is shameful. Some high schools won't even talk about human reproduction for fear of angering prudish parents into rallying against them. My teenage daughter once told me about an incident which made me furious. On the one day her "health" class set aside to discuss sex, a classmate asked a question about birth control and was told by the teacher, "we're not allowed to discuss that." Naturally, I called the school immediately to ask "what the hell" and the principal was weakly apologetic. He explained that the parents who don't want sex ed taught, while in the minority, are far more vocal and likely to cause trouble than the parents who want their children to know the facts. This speaks volumes about the cowardice of some of our nation's policies. A sickening number of parents are letting their children hump each other in blind ignorance because they're afraid of confronting the "God crowd" for the right to let their children be taught about sex and they're terrified of discussing it themselves. I think that a majority of teenage pregnancies result from ignorance, false assumptions (such as "you can't get pregnant if you douche afterward") and inadequate emotional guidance.


A prime example of such political cowardice is the case of Joycelyn Elders. To refresh a few memories, she was the Surgeon General under Clinton's administration who got fired for the mere suggestion that we teach children about masturbation as an alternative to intercourse. The majority of Americans were not outraged by this, but the uber-religious minority went berzerk, so they were catered to. If we're to have any hope of educating our kids about sex, we're going to have to stand up to those bullies who believe that their "religious freedom" should include the right to suppress the education of everyone else. Until then, there's going to be a teenage girl somewhere jumping up and down after sex because she heard that will keep you from getting pregnant.


I also think that there should be a free and comprehensive birth control clinic in every major city, but that's a rant I'll save for another thread.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Apr 10, 2010 - 4:53PM #22
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,748

Apr 10, 2010 -- 3:02PM, Damianaraven wrote:


Apr 10, 2010 -- 2:04PM, newsjunkie wrote:


Yes there are PL people who do support increasing assistance to families with children, including raising taxes to help them. It would be good if those PLers would speak out in support of having society as a whole help families. That would probably make more of an impact on PLers like my facebook friend, who (based on her postings) lashes against  anyone who is not aligned with her political and religious views, than anything anybody who is PC says.




I'm not entirely sure that more welfare assistance "after the fact" will do any good. On the contrary, generous benefit programs seem to entice a certain type of women to become "professional" mothers at the expense of the system. Don't get me wrong - I'm all in favor of government programs, but I find I must insist on programs that will actually help instead of providing people with incentive to breed rampantly. For example, I think that free day care programs should be expanded exponentially while cash benefits should be minimized or even done away with. The biggest hindrance to single mothers is the need for child care. If a woman has two or more children, the cost of day care becomes more than can be offset by a working class job. It's this simple mathematical fact (rather than laziness) which causes many women to decide that getting a job isn't worth it. Another fact (this one of a socio-economic nature) is that people who work and pay taxes are a BENEFIT to society, so every effort should be made to get these women WORKING in such a way that they and their can live decently on the wages they earn.


A better way of using government money to eliminate the need for abortion is EDUCATION. What passes for sex ed in our public schools is shameful. Some high schools won't even talk about human reproduction for fear of angering prudish parents into rallying against them. My teenage daughter once told me about an incident which made me furious. On the one day her "health" class set aside to discuss sex, a classmate asked a question about birth control and was told by the teacher, "we're not allowed to discuss that." Naturally, I called the school immediately to ask "what the hell" and the principal was weakly apologetic. He explained that the parents who don't want sex ed taught, while in the minority, are far more vocal and likely to cause trouble than the parents who want their children to know the facts. This speaks volumes about the cowardice of some of our nation's policies. A sickening number of parents are letting their children hump each other in blind ignorance because they're afraid of confronting the "God crowd" for the right to let their children be taught about sex and they're terrified of discussing it themselves. I think that a majority of teenage pregnancies result from ignorance, false assumptions (such as "you can't get pregnant if you douche afterward") and inadequate emotional guidance.


A prime example of such political is the case of Joycelyn Elders. To refresh a few memories, she was the Surgeon General under Clinton's administration who got fired for the mere suggestion that we teach children about masturbation as an alternative to intercourse. The majority of Americans were not outraged by this, but the uber-religious minority went berzerk, so they were catered to. If we're to have any hope of educating our kids about sex, we're going to have to stand up to those bullies who believe that their "religious freedom" should include the right to suppress the education of everyone else. Until then, there's going to be a teenage girl somewhere jumping up and down after sex because she heard that will keep you from getting pregnant.


I also think that there should be a free and comprehensive birth control clinic in every major city, but that's a rant I'll save for another thread.




I agree that BC should be free to those who can't afford it. I agree with your comments about sex education. This country's puritanical streak can cause difficultlies. Good for you for calling the school about their program's shortcomings. Yes, we need to work at decreasing unintended pregnancy. We'll never get to a point where there is zero need for abortion, but preventing unintended pregnancy will do more toward reducing abortion, with less adverse effects, than severely restricting access to abortion, IMO (and I suspect we agree on that).


It's not just sex education that is behind-the-times in the US; too often our public schools fail our children in general. I think that if we educate children more effectively, there will be fewer girls/women who use childbearing as a "way out" of a difficult situation. I also think that the stereotype "welfare mother" that was presented in the 1980s was a bit exaggerated. No, it's not good to have a system that encourages dependency, but it's also not good to punish children for the failings of their parents, as too often that just results in another generation who are less prepared for success. It's not an easy problem to solve; like the abortion issue, poverty is a multi-faceted issue. Even though there will always be people who "work the system," I still think that society has an obligation to the poor, especially when we fail them in other areas like education. I think there are programs that help give people training and skills to help them succeed on their own. Until they can do so, I think we ought to help their children. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  May 02, 2010 - 10:54PM #23
Yavanna
Posts: 3,149

Apr 9, 2010 -- 6:27PM, Bei1052 wrote:


Apr 9, 2010 -- 12:07AM, Yavanna wrote:

Your glibness does you no credit nor does it support your circular reasoning.



...Yeah. Circular reasoning. That's exactly what it is.


(I wonder when Bnet will get around to adding sarcasm tags?)


Do you even know what circular reasoning is?




I don't reply to sarcasm and insult other than to say I don't reply to it. Smile

The dwarves of yore made mighty spells,
While hammers fell like ringing bells
In places deep, where dark things sleep,
In hollow halls beneath the fells.

For ancient king and elvish lord
There many a gloaming golden hoard
They shaped and wrought, and light they caught
To hide in gems on hilt of sword.
- J.R.R. Tolkien
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  May 29, 2010 - 12:55PM #24
jlb32168
Posts: 13,390

Mar 30, 2010 -- 2:01AM, Damianaraven wrote:

My point is that claiming abortion is "dangerous" is merely a woogie-boogie scare tactic to decry it as a human right. I call shenanigans on that!


I agree.  I also think that it is equally absurd to cast parturient death or pregnancy as akin to a gasoline cat with karosene collar strolling through hell.


I also suspect that more pregnant women are killed in car crashes than are killed because of pregnancy related complications; however, we see no movement on the part of anyone to prohibted pregnant women from driving.  I conclude that it is because all parties regard the risk as negligible; therefore, it seems quite foolish for PCers to say that abortion should be available ad infinitum because of the dangers pregnancy presents. 


I noticed your statistics were from 2005.  Why didn't you cite newer statistics? 

Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  May 31, 2010 - 9:31AM #25
faith713
Posts: 3,892

Apr 10, 2010 -- 4:53PM, newsjunkie wrote:


 Even though there will always be people who "work the system," I still think that society has an obligation to the poor, especially when we fail them in other areas like education. I think there are programs that help give people training and skills to help them succeed on their own. Until they can do so, I think we ought to help their children. 




We should help their children instead of helping to kill them off.

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."--John14:6

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.-- John 3:16

"We love Him because He first loved us."--1 John 4:9-10

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear ... "
1 John 4:18
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 17, 2010 - 10:53AM #26
anidominus
Posts: 105

It's basically impossible to know which is riskier because abortion is under scrutney and it is protected in the since that if anything goes wrong with an abortion the clinic is under no obligation to report it. 


They can simply send the girl to the hospital and they are more likely than not going to say it was a complication of pregnancy.  The girl probably won't tell the hospital she was having an abortion and it went wrong and there are many in the medical profession who won't report if a woman comes in hurt because of an abortion.


The statics shown about childbirth/pregnancy or good stats because the process isn't under scrutney and no one is trying to project it.  Also the stats from pregancy gone wrong may be influced by abortions goin wrong.


The last statistics I saw put abortion at 99.999% safe while pregnancy/childbrith was at 99.99% safe.  (those stats may have been soley related to deaths and not injruies).  I remember this stat becaue pro-choicers use to always suggest that abortion was 10 times safer.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook